↓ Skip to main content

Estimating long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HPV 16/18 vaccine in China

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Estimating long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HPV 16/18 vaccine in China
Published in
BMC Cancer, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2893-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qian Zhang, Yi-Jun Liu, Shang-Ying Hu, Fang-Hui Zhao

Abstract

Human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 and 18 are the two most common HPV oncogenic types that can be prevented by vaccination. This study aimed at assessing the cost-effectiveness of 3 doses of the bivalent HPV vaccine in rural and urban settings in China. A Markov model was adapted to reflect the lifetime of a modelled 100,000 12-year-old girls cohort in rural and urban settings in China. Input parameters were obtained from published literature, official reports and a two-round expert review panel. Clinical and economic outcomes of vaccination at age 12 with screening was compared to screening only. In the base case analysis, a 3 % discount rate, the vaccine cost of 247 CNY (US$ 39, PAHO vaccine cost in 2013), two rounds of screening in a life time and 70 % coverage for both screening and vaccination were used. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. We used different thresholds of cost-effectiveness to reflect the diversity of economic development in China. Vaccination in addition to screening could prevent 60 % more cervical cancer cases and deaths than screening only. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio varied largely when changing cost of vaccination and discount in one way analysis. Vaccination was very cost-effective when the vaccine cost ranged 87-630 CNY (US$ 13.8-100) in rural and 87-750 CNY (US$ 13.8-119) in urban; and remained cost-effective when the vaccine cost ranged 630-1,700 CNY (US$ 100-270) in rural and 750-1,900 CNY (US$ 119-302) in urban in two way analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that model results were robust. In both rural and urban, the vaccination cost and discounting are important factors determining the cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination; policy makers in China should take these into account when making a decision on the introduction of HPV vaccine. In areas with a high burden of cervical cancer and limited screening activities, HPV vaccination should be prioritized. However, the vaccine cost needs to be reduced in order to make it very cost-effective and affordable as well, in particular in poverty areas with high disease burden.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 20%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 19 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,179,345
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,930
of 8,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,529
of 311,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#29
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,330 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.